Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
August 27, 2014, 04:01:47 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Don't forget to get your 2013 Gubernatorial Endorsements and Predictions in!

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 67
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Carson vs. Democrat on: Today at 03:33:03 pm
This is what the map between Ben Carson and Hillary Clinton could potentially look like IMO (especially if Carson runs a particularly bad campaign):


Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (D-NY)/Senator Mark Warner (D-VA): 420 Electoral Votes
Neurosurgeon Ben Carson (R-MD)/Former Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA): 118 Electoral Votes

Lol why in the world would he pick Santorum?
I wasn't really sure on a running-mate for Carson and figured that Santorum would have been the most likely choice for him.

Carson is very conservative, but I suspect he is the kind of candidate who would be willing to choose a more moderate running mate in order to balance the ticket. Cathy McMorris Rodgers wouldn't overshadow him too much, and neither would Kelly Ayotte; unfortunately I'm not sure how the Republican base would accept a ticket comprised of a black man and a white woman Sad

Also, one comment about your map: why wouldn't Louisiana vote Democratic in your map, especially since Hillary Clinton is the party's nominee? Louisiana is more urban than Mississippi, and both have a significant minority presence, so if the latter flips, the former should as well.
Good point about Louisiana. If Hilary Clinton is carrying Mississippi, she would probably win Louisiana as well.
2  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Carson vs. Democrat on: Today at 01:33:38 pm
This is what the map between Ben Carson and Hillary Clinton could potentially look like IMO (especially if Carson runs a particularly bad campaign):


Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (D-NY)/Senator Mark Warner (D-VA): 420 Electoral Votes
Neurosurgeon Ben Carson (R-MD)/Former Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA): 118 Electoral Votes

Lol why in the world would he pick Santorum?
I wasn't really sure on a running-mate for Carson and figured that Santorum would have been the most likely choice for him.
3  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Carson vs. Democrat on: Today at 11:35:07 am
This is what the map between Ben Carson and Hillary Clinton could potentially look like IMO (especially if Carson runs a particularly bad campaign):


Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (D-NY)/Senator Mark Warner (D-VA): 420 Electoral Votes
Neurosurgeon Ben Carson (R-MD)/Former Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA): 118 Electoral Votes
4  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Past Election What-ifs (US) / Re: 1976:Carter/Mondale vs. Reagan/Schweiker on: August 25, 2014, 05:32:00 pm
Reagan loses the election, because the country was not ready for such a conservative president in 1976. After Carter won the election over Reagan, I see a comeback for Gerald Ford in 1980. After serving one term (he would have been term limited in 1984) with George Bush as Vice President, Bush might have won the White House in 1984. In 1988 he is reelected and in 1992 the Democrats win again with Bill Clinton.


Former Governor Jimmy Carter/Senator Walter Mondale 311 EV. 51.0%
Former Governeir Ronald Reagan/Senator Richard Schweiker 227 EV. 47.6%
That map looks about right, though Jimmy Carter would have a pretty good shot at winning Vermont and Michigan against Ronald Reagan. Aa for his future after losing, I could see Ronald Reagan getting elected to the Senate in 1980 agains Alan Cranston.
5  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Do you have a flip phone? on: August 25, 2014, 08:53:46 am
I haven't used one since 2008.
6  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: 1948 Presidential Election on: August 23, 2014, 01:35:04 pm
1. Truman
2. Dewey
3. Wallace
4. Thomas
5. Watson
6. Teichert
7. Dobbs
8. Thurmond
7  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Forum racists on: August 23, 2014, 10:58:16 am
This thread went downhill rather quickly.
8  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Who would have the best shot at IA? on: August 23, 2014, 10:50:51 am
9  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2014 Senatorial Election Polls / Re: WY: Rasmussen: Senator Enzi (R) far ahead. on: August 22, 2014, 03:12:23 pm
Incumbants rn't safe this yr but Enzi may win with the same % Hagen in NC, + AK + LA will give democrats 52 seats + one of NE, AR, GA and ALG wins in KY.
Keep in mind that we also got AL, ID, and both OK seats up this yr. Sessions, Risch, Inhofe and Lankford rn't safe at all. We can still end up with between 57-58 seats this yr.

Putting all jokes aside, Mike Enzi is probably among the safest incumbents in this election cycle. I would not be surprised if he received well over 70% of the vote when all is said and done.
10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: if Hillary doesn't run, and Republicans take back the White House on: August 22, 2014, 02:19:02 pm
From the looks of this article (which was posted on the forum a couple weeks back), It seems that Hillary Clinton is already preparing the groundwork for a 2016 Presidential run.

http://hollywoodlife.com/2014/08/05/hillary-clinton-campaign-president-running-2016/

Getting back to the original question, I don't think that Hillary Clinton will become an outcast in the Democratic Party if she somehow decides not to run. Heck, it is also possible that Clinton's reputation might even improve in the eyes of some people.
11  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Voting Booth / Re: August 2014 Federal Election - At-Large Senate on: August 22, 2014, 01:54:47 pm
AT-LARGE SENATE

[3] Alfred F. Jones of Rhode Island
Labor Party
[6] Bacon King of Oceania
National Front to Restore Democracy
[4] Clarence of Florida
Federalist Party
[7] Deus naturae of New York
Democratic-Republican Party
[5] Dr Cynic of Pennsylvania
Labor Party
[9] GAworth of South Dakota
P.E.A.C.E. Party
[10] JohannesCalvinusLibertas (JCL) of Indiana
Federalist Party
[8] LuminevonReuental of Utah
Federalist Party
[2] Mechaman of Indiana
Bad Party
[11] Poirot of New York
Independent
[1] Polnut of Massachusetts
The People's Party
[ ] Write-in:______________________________
-__________________
[ ] None of the above
12  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: Which State is "deader" for the GOP? #2 on: August 21, 2014, 12:24:31 pm
NY has a republican Governor and they control the Senate. So, California.
Since when is Gov. Cuomo a republican? (The last time the GOP got the majority of the vote in an NY gubernatorial election was in 1998, although Pataki did manage to get reelected in 2002 due to split opposition.)
I think Niemeyerite was making fun of the fact that some people on the forum don't support Andrew Cuomo because he isn't liberal enough for them.
13  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: When did you first hear of.... on: August 21, 2014, 12:02:58 pm
Barack Obama: I remember my mom watching portions of his DNC convention speech in 2004 on our old 1995 Sony Trinitron TV. I did not know too much about him until late-2006/early-2007, when I read a Time Magazine article about him around the time he announced his candidacy.

Hillary Clinton: I have some vague memories of Hillary Clinton during her time as First Lady around 1998 or 1999. In 2008, I initially supported her candidacy and even convinced several family members to vote for her in the Democratic primaries.

Joe Biden: When Obama picked him as his running-mate in 2008.

George W. Bush: When he was running for President in 2000.

Dick Cheney: At the same time that Bush picked him as his running-mate.

Mitt Romney: I first read about Mitt Romney in late-2009 when looking up the prospective Republican candidates for 2012 on Wikipedia.

John McCain: When he announced his candidacy for the Republican nomination in 2007.

Rudy Giuliani: I first heard of Rudy Giuliani around the time that 9/11 occurred. Like many others, I was impressed with his handling of 9/11.

Ron Paul: In mid-2007, I went into the local Quick Check and saw several Ron Paul signs in place on the bulletin board. One of them said that he was the “Taxpayers Best Friend” or something to that effect. I did not research Ron Paul’s policy positions until 2009 however.

Sarah Palin: In early-2008, I did a school project on Alaska and remember reading that Sarah Palin was the Governor of the state.

Michelle Bachmann: I first learned about Michelle Bachmann on an episode of the McLaughlin Group from February of 2010. She was being discussed by the panelists as a rising star in the conservative movement.

Newt Gingrich: Shortly after Obama was elected, my 9th grade history teacher told me that Gingrich would be his top choice in 2012 and went over his achievements as House Speaker.

Rick Santorum: Around 2005 or 2006. I remember being put-off by his strong support for the Iraq War/neoconservative foreign policy views and his vocal opposition to gay marriage.
14  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Which atheist do you have a more positive opinion of? on: August 21, 2014, 11:30:14 am
Hitchens, but I like both of them.
15  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Was Christopher Hitchens a right winger? on: August 21, 2014, 11:28:19 am
No, and I don't classify him as right or left.  He was just awesome.  A bit hawkish, but still awesome. 
16  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Hypothetical 2016 US Presidential Election on: August 21, 2014, 11:27:17 am
I would probably vote for Al Gore, though I would expect Mitt Romney to win easily.
17  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: 1852 Presidential Election on: August 21, 2014, 11:24:18 am
The one that was against the expansion of slavery into the western territories.
18  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Opinion of Chris McDaniel on: August 21, 2014, 11:22:56 am
Massive HP (not a white supremacist)
19  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: Who will win in Oregon? on: August 21, 2014, 10:49:51 am
Easily Jeff Merkley. Monica Wehby is extremely overrated as a candidate and would be lucky if she received 45% of the vote
20  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Happy Birthday, Waltermitty. on: August 21, 2014, 10:45:05 am
Happy Birthday to one of our most famous posters!
21  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: The Good Post Gallery II on: August 21, 2014, 10:42:47 am
So maybe it is on that line of thinking that the author has completely omitted the race issue.  But then again, if that were the case he would've at least done the intellectually honest thing of devoting more than three words to describe just how important abolitionism was to the Republican cause.  At the same time, the white supremacy of southern Democrats is completely ignored.  Methinks that the author is trying to subscribe to a very convenient version of history where there is a left wing party and there is a right wing party and nothing in between.  Methinks he's wrong and is ignoring the possibility that not all coalitions (especially in American history) are necessarily ideologically sound and that the two party system in the US has forced in the past and will continue to force Big Tent alliances.  This was arguably a lot more true of the Democratic Party than it was the Republican Party.  While one could argue that the cultures of Norwegian socialists in Minnesota and Brahmin businessmen in Boston were alike in many ways, it would be very hard to make that same argument between Irish socialists in Butte, Montana and white landowners in South Carolina.  As I noted to TNF once on chat that is because the Republicans have always had, and will continue to have a general overall strategy and theme ("Americanism") while the Democrats in the past and to this day prefer to operate as a cultural coalition that have almost no unifying theme except they are "not Republican".  This might also explain why, ironically, that it is harder for Republicans to connect with non-white minorities, being the party of "100% Americanism" as Teddy Roosevelt once described.
Again, this is an opposite fallacy of what many on the forum make that anti-black racism was the deciding factor of how liberal or conservative someone was.  This guy, by contrast, seems to be operating in a world where race wasn't a significant factor.  Well race was a factor, and on a level much more than even many on this forum give it credit for.  As I have noted in the past, racism against the ethnic working class in the North by Republicans and certain elitist Democrats is almost completely and totally whitewashed in favor of a simple black and white view of the way things went.

So too, is the history of the Republican Party thoroughly whitewashed (author references a historian who erroneously states that the "even the name of the Republican Party is a lie", pray tell what is the point of calling it that then?) beyond all recognition.  The early GOP was a hodgepodge coalition of everyone from former New England Whigs to upper midwest anti-slavery Democrats to former Free Soilers to anti-slavery Know Nothings to German Marxists, etc etc.  Slavery WAS THE ISSUE that united these people together who differed on a great many other issues like trade, currency, and other morality issues.  This account of the Republican Party's formation as merely a successor to the economic nationalist tradition of Hamilton is about the most revisionist claptrap I've come across in a good long while, to say the least.  Does the author seriously believe that the Homestead Act was born out of Hamiltonian influence?

Further, not even the explanation for the Whig Party is satisfactory and leaves much to be desired.  While the Whigs generally were on the more conservative side of the coin, even that is not an entirely honest conclusion on the party.  Certainly by the 1840's the Whigs were more an anti-Democratic Party than they were merely a "conservative" party.  People forget, much like this author, that the Whigs consisted of a wide ideological coalition of people who were united in their opposition to Andrew Jackson than anything.  The party leadership might've been economic nationalists, but the only three Whig presidents we had in action certainly didn't live up to the nationalist label as the author has portrayed.  If anything, the motivation of Whigs to form a party was in response to the activism of the Jackson Era, though the inherent elitism of many Whigs arguably makes them irrevocably conservative compared to their more populist Jackson Democratic counterparts.
Of course, I should also mention that the author quotes George Wallace almost unironically when describing the political system that has existed since the 1930s.  I do agree with him about the inherent conservatism of much of the New Deal (do you guys really think FDR did it with government alone?  I mean come on!) as well as Wilson's own conservative sympathies ("the Fed", lol) that is overlooked by many.  However, a reference to George Wallace in an article that completely omits any mention of blacks or race (interesting fact: if you do a word search for "race" you'll come across those four letters in the word "embrace" three times in the article) or any mention of the white supremacist Jim Crow regimes is pretty suspect.

Point is, I highly doubt that Grover Cleveland was a Left Wing Democrat.

But yeah that is all for now, I'll reread the article later and comment more as time permits.
22  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: What year will a Democrat win the Texas governorship? on: August 21, 2014, 10:28:26 am
I guess in either 2030 or 2034.
23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / U.S. Presidential Election Results / Re: What if West Virginia never split off from Virginia? on: August 20, 2014, 10:12:39 pm
WVa during Byrd yrs was Dem dominated, while VA was GOP favored during 60's.

It started changing when John Warner, who wasnt a segregationalist was elected to senate.

On the contrary, the Byrd machine dominated Virginia, not West Virginia. John Warner's election in 1978 was long after the end of its dominance, though some figures still held office then (like Harry Byrd, Jr.). William Spong's victory in the Democratic Senate primary in 1966, Harry Byrd Sr.'s death that same year, and Linwood Holton being elected Governor in 1969 were the nails in the coffin. Warner was elected to the Senate some ten years later.
William Spong would have been the first Senator from Virginia who I would have been willing to support and Linwood Holton would have likewise been one of the first Governors of Virginia that I would have supported. I doubt that I would have ever voted for either Harry Byrd Sr. or Harry Byrd Jr. in any of their Senate races due to my ideological differences with them on racial issues.
24  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: What avatar color and state would best fit the preceding poster? on: August 20, 2014, 10:06:34 pm
25  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If Jay Nixon runs for president or is veep, can he do well with black voters? on: August 20, 2014, 12:20:35 pm
If Jay Nixon somehow becomes the Democratic nominee in 2016, he would probably win the black vote by the same margin that John Kerry won it in 2004 (88%).

Nixon ran for the Senate twice before.  The last time was in 1998, when he ran against incumbent Republican Kit Bond.  Bond won 53-44 that year, carrying 33% of the Black vote.

Nixon has historically had cool relations with Missouri's black community.
It's interesting how Kit Bond did relatively alright among black voters against Jay Nixon, though he wasn't particularly offensive/reactionary on racial issues.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 67


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines